The Moral Argument for God's Existence

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Morality is man made. The standard of right and wrong, therefore, may vary from culture to culture. (Though usually there is shared morality on significant issues, such as murder).

Did man make the trees? Or anything else that exists?

The idea of what is right or wrong didn't just spring up in man's conscience by some evolutionary process. How could anyone possibly know that?

That's pure hypothesizing.

@secondson said
Did man make the trees? Or anything else that exists?

The idea of what is right or wrong didn't just spring up in man's conscience by some evolutionary process. How could anyone possibly know that?

That's pure hypothesizing.

'The idea of what is right or wrong didn't just spring up in man's conscience by some evolutionary process.'


Yes it did. 😆

@ghost-of-a-duke said
'The idea of what is right or wrong didn't just spring up in man's conscience by some evolutionary process.'


Yes it did. 😆

Did not. 😆

@fmf said
Lemonjello to sonship: [b]You are so entrenched in your provincial theistic understanding that you cannot take up an honest view of atheism even under hypothetical posit. A self-sustaining milieu and inculcation of theism has thoroughly trashed your ability to be honest and genuine on this point. If you were honest in this respect, you would know that we all characteristically ...[text shortened]... eaking ~ because of your atheism ~ and that he had run rings around you blah blah blah. Fascinating.

You and Lemonjello are so entrenched in your provincial atheistic understanding that you cannot take up an honest view of theism even under hypothetical posit. A self-sustaining milieu and inculcation of atheism has thoroughly trashed your ability to be honest and genuine on this point. If you were honest in this respect, you would know that only within the framework of God's existence would genuine moral obligation exist.

@dj2becker said
Seems you only have a strawman there. You seem quite hesitant to make it.

Sorry, I don't play your lame games of burden-shifting.

@SecondSon

Then to what do you appeal in order to orient your moral/ethical commitments?

Critical thinking about justificatory components, of course. It is precisely that sort of thinking that is systemically disallowed by many versions of theological voluntarism, and that’s why those versions are inherently childish. Since you’re obviously not up to speed, you could try educating yourself a bit by reading some of the previous threads to which I already linked.

The rest of your post is pure chaff.

@lemonjello said
@SecondSon

Then to what do you appeal in order to orient your moral/ethical commitments?

Critical thinking about justificatory components, of course. It is precisely that sort of thinking that is systemically disallowed by many versions of theological voluntarism, and that’s why those versions are inherently childish. Since you’re obviously not up t ...[text shortened]... g some of the previous threads to which I already linked.

The rest of your post is pure chaff.

"Critical thinking about justificatory components,.."

Which simply means a relativistic self-styled code of conduct taylor made for and by those that, by faith, dismiss the existence of a moral creator God.

@lemonjello said
Sorry, I don't play your lame games of burden-shifting.

Figured as much, didn't think you had it in you.

PS: Asking an atheist to justify moral accountability within an atheistic framework is not burden-shifting.

@LemonJello

One does not need perfect and comprehensive knowledge of the consequences of one's moral activity in order to be able to reasonably identify those to whom one owes moral duties or obligations. And, surely, one does not need such perfect knowledge in order to provide counterexamples to your claim that all such duties are owed to God.

How do you feel about a medical doctor who, let's say, rapes a female patient while she is sedated. And she awakes completely unaware.

The lustful doctor has violated her, had his enjoyment, and no one knows about it for the rest of his life but he. The victimized women knows nothing about it. Neither does the community "that exists" have a clue.

Has that doctor done a reasonable job to fulfill his moral obligations to the community (albeit with a little private secret fun on the side)?

In my world view God knows and God will call for a reckoning.

In your world view that is "childish."
If so then I'll gladly take "childish" to an atheistic failure to expect the balance of justice to be set aright.

But you tell me. How will you persuade the raping doctor of the wrongness of his action ? To whom further is he obligated?

@sonship said
@LemonJello

One does not need perfect and comprehensive knowledge of the consequences of one's moral activity in order to be able to reasonably identify those to whom one owes moral duties or obligations. And, surely, one does not need such perfect knowledge in order to provide counterexamples to your claim that all such duties are owed to God.

How d ...[text shortened]... rsuade the raping doctor of the wrongness of his action ? To whom further is he obligated?

In his probing book called The Grand Weaver, well-known apologist and author Ravi Zacharias records a story he once read. Let me give it to you in his own words:

The writer described a man aboard a plane who propositioned a woman sitting next to him for one million dollars. She glared at him but pursued the conversation and began to entertain the possibility of so easily becoming a millionaire. The pair set the time, terms, and conditions. Just before he left the plane, he sputtered, “I—I have to admit, ma’am, I have sort of, ah, led you into a lie. I, um, I really don’t have a million dollars. Would you consider the proposition for just—ah, say—ah, ten dollars?”

On the verge of smacking him across the face for such an insult, she snapped back, “What do you think I am?”

“That has already been established,” he replied. “Now we’re just haggling over the price.”

This begs the question, would you give into that temptation if the price was right?

There is a great audio clip about this here:
https://www.rzim.org/listen/just-thinking/seductions-of-the-soul-part-1

@dj2becker said
In his probing book called The Grand Weaver, well-known apologist and author Ravi Zacharias records a story he once read. Let me give it to you in his own words:

The writer described a man aboard a plane who propositioned a woman sitting next to him for one million dollars. She glared at him but pursued the conversation and began to entertain the possibility of so easily ...[text shortened]... audio clip about this here:
https://www.rzim.org/listen/just-thinking/seductions-of-the-soul-part-1

LemonJello said, "Luckily, I have cleansed my thinking of such nonsense." Meaning he doesn't think about his morality in terms relative to a morality given by a creator God.

LemonJello's thinking is cleansed of such nonsense. It seems to me that with that kind of mindset one's thinking is subject to a default mode where anything goes.

I used to think like that. Freethinking only served to make me conscious of an emptiness inside nothing could fill.

I guess that thought just never enters some people's mind. Scrubbed too clean I suppose.

@secondson said
LemonJello's thinking is cleansed of such nonsense. It seems to me that with that kind of mindset one's thinking is subject to a default mode where anything goes.

Lemonjello has written a considerable amount about his thinking and his mindset. Where as he proposed a default mode of "anything goes"?

@sonship said
How do you feel about a medical doctor who, let's say, rapes a female patient while she is sedated. And she awakes completely unaware.

If this medical doctor believes that Jesus died for his 'sins", isn't he "forgiven" by your God - according to your beliefs?

@fmf said
Lemonjello has written a considerable amount about his thinking and his mindset. Where as he proposed a default mode of "anything goes"?

You should refrain from asking questions about something I didn't say.

Please read my post carefully and thoughtfully. Then, after careful consideration, you may begin to see the broader picture to which I am referring relative to the subject.

@secondson said
You should refrain from asking questions about something I didn't say.

Please read my post carefully and thoughtfully. Then, after careful consideration, you may begin to see the broader picture to which I am referring relative to the subject.

Can you quote a bit of Lemonjello's writing that supports what you said about him?